[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Hi Andrew,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch>
> Sent: Saturday, July 1, 2023 9:02 AM
> To: Quan, Evan <evan.q...@amd.com>
> Cc: raf...@kernel.org; l...@kernel.org; Deucher, Alexander
> <alexander.deuc...@amd.com>; Koenig, Christian
> <christian.koe...@amd.com>; Pan, Xinhui <xinhui....@amd.com>;
> airl...@gmail.com; dan...@ffwll.ch; johan...@sipsolutions.net;
> da...@davemloft.net; eduma...@google.com; k...@kernel.org;
> pab...@redhat.com; Limonciello, Mario <mario.limoncie...@amd.com>;
> mdaen...@redhat.com; maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com;
> tzimmerm...@suse.de; hdego...@redhat.com; jingyuwang_...@163.com;
> Lazar, Lijo <lijo.la...@amd.com>; jim.cro...@gmail.com;
> bellosili...@gmail.com; andrealm...@igalia.com; t...@redhat.com;
> j...@jsg.id.au; a...@arndb.de; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> a...@vger.kernel.org; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-
> de...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-wirel...@vger.kernel.org;
> net...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/9] wifi: mac80211: Add support for ACPI WBRF
>
> > +static void get_chan_freq_boundary(u32 center_freq,
> > +                              u32 bandwidth,
> > +                              u64 *start,
> > +                              u64 *end)
> > +{
> > +   bandwidth = MHZ_TO_KHZ(bandwidth);
> > +   center_freq = MHZ_TO_KHZ(center_freq);
> > +
> > +   *start = center_freq - bandwidth / 2;
> > +   *end = center_freq + bandwidth / 2;
> > +
> > +   /* Frequency in HZ is expected */
> > +   *start = KHZ_TO_HZ(*start);
> > +   *end = KHZ_TO_HZ(*end);
> > +}
>
> This seems pretty generic, so maybe it should be moved into the shared code?
> It can then become a NOP when the functionality if disabled.
The shared code you mean is some place around mac80211?
Actually, there are two similar variants existed already: 
cfg80211_get_start_freq and cfg80211_get_end_freq.
The outputs of them are really what most mac80211 logics care.
The new API here is unlikely to be shared by other mac80211 part.
So, I suppose placing it here(only in wbrf.c) seems proper.
How do you think?

Evan
>
>       Andrew

Reply via email to